skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Well, they are literally in the business of making OpenPGP easy to use. I understand your worry but I can also understand where they're coming from. The fact is PGP is stupidly hard. I once ran into a gpg bug that deleted my master key. I got so frustrated I just gave up and forgot about it for years. Without services like Proton Mail, this stuff is just never going to be mainstream.

The only way to retain full control over all the keys is to do it the hard way: manually encrypt the emails and send that payload via SMTP. If we refuse to give them the keys, we can't enjoy the convenience of Proton Mail doing that automatically for us. Proton Mail offers a middle ground and it's a very attractive one if you accept the inherent risks associated with giving them the keys.

I'm not willing to give them the master key though. I want the ability to generate a bunch of subkeys just for them. Then I can just revoke those keys if they're ever compromised, and the emails will be encrypted and signed by my actual OpenPGP identity that I'm investing time into, not a separate master key generated for my Proton Mail account.

The support guys confirmed to me in writing via email that Proton Mail only ever uses the signing and encryption subkeys. They don't need the master key.

> We use the signing subkey for signing and the encryption subkey for encryption, and you will have to import the whole OpenPGP at once.

So I asked them directly to add support for importing just the subkeys.

I made a post on their user voice thing about this too. It's garnered a bit of support already.

https://protonmail.uservoice.com/forums/284483-proton-mail/s...

Let's see what happens.
Yes it's a strangely skewed article focusing on proton, when:

> Once he got it, he asked Apple for information about this second email address, and got its name, home address, and phone number. Afterwards, the Civil Guard also asked the telephone company responsible for the telephone number who was the owner of the line, which matches the name provided by Apple. Also, they say they have found that this person is registered at the same address provided by Apple.
Agreed, realistically you're going to either convert the data or give up on using the function rather than reimplementing it to support another data layout efficiently; while converting the code instead of the data, so to speak, is more efficient from the machine resource use POV, it can be very rough on human resources.

(The article is basically about not having to give up in some cases where you can tweak the input parameters and make things work without rewriting the function; but it's not always possible)
ChatGPT is great for providing endless reading material too!
generously and with a little more respect.
The example given by parent does not need eval to trigger though. Just create a function and replace its code object then call it, it will easily segfault.
The Antisocial Network: How the 90s Internet Died Like Diaryland (2014)
And for the in-demand FAANG jobs: we only accept applicationa written in blackletter on vellum
The perils inherent of FOSS and letting random people in.
'I remember Paul Auster': a tribute by Jonathan Lethem to his friend
You guys have teams that decide the infra they run ?
Thanks! Glad to see someone else with similar experiences. The other issue I think people are overlooking is... 20 years ago you would present to your local, low-cost veterinarian, and they wouldn't know what the issue was (or they knew and couldnt treat it), and your animal would just die.

Now we have a ton more information, a ton more training, and an issue now that would be game-ending prior is now treatable, but it comes at a cost. We see the same patterns in human medicine too. A lot of it has to do with demographics and cultural shifts in my opinion, as well as the supply/demand factor of trained practitioners.
COVID was a single DARPA grant cycle in length. These companies move at glacial paces compared to the SaaS plays that the typical HN dev is familiar with. I'm guessing COVID never really threatened big programs like Starliner.
In short: yes. Imagine you bought a home using a mortgage in the year 2000 in Silicon Valley. Then you go bankrupt in 2007. Your home will probably have appreciated 100-200% during this crazy period. It is very possible you will receive money back from the bank after they sell your home.
Asyncio allows you to replace the event loop with an implementation of your own. For Temporal Python we represent workflows as a custom, durable asyncio event loops so things like asyncio.sleep are durable timers (i.e. code can resume on another machine, so you can sleep for weeks). Here is a post explaining how it's done: https://temporal.io/blog/durable-distributed-asyncio-event-l....

The biggest problem with asyncio is how easy/common it is in Python to be able to block the asyncio thread with synchronous calls, gumming up the whole system. Python sorely needs a static analysis tool that can build a call graph to help detect if a known thread-blocking call is called directly or directly from an async def.
No, when I moved from the Netherlands to Sweden some 22 years ago I put out several cubic metres of hardware and software for all to come and loot since I only had a small truck to move all my stuff in one go. That board was in one of the machines and hopefully found a new life elsewhere.
Minors essentially don't have the same rights as adults.
Your math is off. They have to pay the engineers whether it’s towards Google or Microsoft. Those $20B are pure profit
I think you missed a step in your progression.

Step one, you connect to the network and get routes.

Step two, you connect your VPN.

Step three, your host starts sending traffic. At this point, your firewall rules are now active and dropping any traffic you've told them to.

Step four, you renew your DHCP lease and get new routes via option 121. Those routes might be malicious, or they might not.

One of three things is true at step four. Either:

A. Your firewall rules will block all traffic over the new routes

B. Your firewal rules will not block any traffic over the new routes

C. Your firewall rules will block some subset of traffic over the new routes

If A is true, then your VPN tunnel goes down (undesirable), as the VPN server can no longer be contacted.

If B is true, then you are vulnerable to the TunnelVision exploit.

If C is true, and the subset of traffic blocked is exactly the subset intended to route over the VPN but maliciously diverted, then the VPN tunnel goes down because the firewall rules are blocking its traffic.

If C is true, and somehow the firewall rule is rewriting the traffic that's pointed not-over-the-VPN to be instead routed over the VPN (by using NAT?), then the VPN tunnel stays up and there is no problem.

I'd be interested in seeing the set of firewall rules that will let the VPN tunnel stay up, with management traffic going over the added-after-the-tunnel-was-brought-up next-hop, and tunneled traffic continuing to flow ignoring the new route. I haven't seen those rules in the past so if you have experience writing them, please show me.

Personally I've only used Linux multiple routing tables to plug this leak.

EDIT: formatting
ULA (a largely anticompetitive merger of Boeing and Lockheed for those who don't know) was actively and patronizingly taunting SpaceX during their efforts at reuse, making comments along the lines of 'We tried reuse. The economics just don't work out. Good luck learning what we already did.' He (Tory Bruno, CEO of ULA) seemed to be under the impression that reuse was only possible Space Shuttle style, which was them essentially "refurbishing" engines to the point of rebuilding them after each launch, and claiming it was reuse.

There's every reason to believe that this is also exactly what they genuinely believed - that SpaceX was just going to be a failed gimmick. They made 0 efforts to try to ensure they stayed technologically ahead of SpaceX, in spite of having many orders of magnitude greater resources and manpower available to themselves. They simply watched, mocked, and became obsolete.

In any case ULA's not going anywhere. Boeing and Lockheed are both major arms dealers that the US government depends on to keep the bombs flying.
Those people will actually be grateful they don't have to deal and spend weeks to debug yet another cloud provider hidden gotcha or bug and convince support they are right. They will now very happy as they can now deliver value (at relative scale) and really speed up processes. I know I am.

Good ol' bare metal is real nice, but it won't save you from application complexity, security requirements, and so on - you still need to manage it somewhat. If you're not a startup looking for market fit at least.
If that's not bad enough, big tobacco is still big in the global South.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/09/how-children-a...
You can’t have free markets if you use Motte and Bailey arguments to justify rejecting all forms of free markets, instead of just market failures.
"[R]ecourse mortgage": It would be better to say "recourse loan". Mortgages are specific to properties. Loans are generic for anything. In my personal experience, non-recourse loans are basically payday loans with horribly high rates. You would never do it, if given the choice. I guess that 100% of home mortgages (in highly developed countries) are recourse by legal requirements.
I honestly can't follow the line of your argument. You say "truth" but then you say "different perspective". Which one? You say engage in long form conversation but you're not really engaging in conversation here. You say shatter the veil of the propagandist but you're engaging in propaganda yourself.

I commented here because the truth is not being told about the number of journalists killed in Gaza. That number is artificially inflated and used as propaganda. You're misdirecting to the family of Al Jazeera bureau chief. He was not killed by the way (you seem to imply he was). I don't know the circumstances related to that attack so I can't comment on it. Lots of innocent people were killed in this war and the blame lies squarely on Hamas.

Your comment about the hostages is intellectually unfair. Given Hamas' attack on Oct 7th it is Israel's right to eliminate that threat. Given the situation on the ground and the goal of minimizing casualties to your own side you're inevitably going to see something that looks very similar to what you've seen. There's no way to use massive military force against an enemy like Hamas under the conditions as they exist in Gaza without that.

But even ignoring that, do see you Hamas returning those hostages? There's precedence here, they've held Gilad Shalit for 5 years and they've been holding Avre Mengisto ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avera_Mengistu ) since 2014. Given the combination of the imperative to eliminate Hamas for Israel's security and the fact Hamas would not release hostages unless it is forced to then there's no a lot of wiggle room here. I'm pretty sure Israel is trying to avoid killing hostages which is probably why the Hamas leadership is still alive.

Your comparison to the Gestapo and the Nazis just shows me you know nothing about either. But hey, what else can we talk about on Israel's Holocaust Remembrance Day. If you do want to compare someone to the Nazis try Hamas, a much better fit.

Unfortunately you can't "see the truth" from the comfort of your home on TikTok. You're seeing what some people want you to focus on. You need to step back, look at the whole picture, not just specific events, and use some critical thinking skills to fit everything, not just one event, to a reasonable theory of what is going on.

If you're interesting in how Hamas treats journalists here's some resources:

https://www.amnesty.ca/human-rights-news/gaza-hamas-must-end...

https://www.amnesty.ca/human-rights-news/gaza-journalist-fac...

You're likely not going to get any "truth" from any Palestinian in Gaza because they risk retribution for not toeing the Hamas line.
No they cannot anymore than a house? Unless you purport that Intel truly does not own those giant facilities in Hillsboro, Oregon. Which, you can also have with a house if title falls through.
And in no way is it possible that compromises have to be made in the real world.
>> How is it that SpaceX was able to accomplish the same thing in a fraction of the time

Because they already had Dragon sending cargo to the ISS at the start of the commercial crew program. They used the money to upgrade and get man rated. Boeing started their capsule from scratch. This still doesn't explain all of it, but nobody else has mentioned their head start.
You are technically correct. Even though that's the best kind of correct, I'd see these later developments as mostly natural refinements of the medium, that didn't really alter the fundamentals.

From Jenson until the first Grotesk fonts I don't think there was anything large one-time leap, but rather a sequence of gradual evolutions.
The Waning Reign of the Muskrat
This is why I no longer watch dubbed movies, especially because those translations often try to mimick the mouth movements rather than the actual meaning.

In Italy a “pepperoni” pizza is translated as “pizza ai peperoni”, which is “bell pepper pizza”
Kinda like the comments feature on Notion.
Careful with That Lock, Eugene: Part 2
So, why can they publish it now? His death doesn’t nullify the agreement, does it?
You should ask your parliament to create the equivalent of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in your country. Gov't backed and buys loans from retail/commercial banks under strict guidelines. This helps to create a huge fixed rate mortgage market in the United States. I agree: Fixed rate mortgages are terrific for increasing home ownership. Plus, it moves the interest rate risk from retail people (less sophisticated) to institutions (banks, etc.) (more sophisticated).
I lost my job to AI this week [video]
If they manage it in my company at least of course, the real question is if they want to manage it (and know what that means). Usually they don't, in my experience.
Your guess would be incorrect. Boeing felt they were in risk of collapse during COVID and immediately went to the government asking for a $60 billion bailout. The government wanted equity in exchange for this bailout, which Boeing didn't want to offer. So they ended up offering Federal Reserve facilitated 'Boeing bonds', and took in about $25 billion to stay afloat. [1] Amusingly a big part of the reason they ended up in such catastrophic danger is that they'd been dumping all their cash reserves into buying their own stock, to try to bring its flagging price up. [2]

[1] - https://www.chicagotribune.com/2020/05/04/how-boeing-was-res...

[2] - https://archive.is/eO3FJ (WaPo archive)
Is kingofpandora also your account?
Doesn't seem that controversial. A publisher commissioned a book about the films of Stanley Kubrick, agreeing that Kubrick would be able to veto publishing of the text if he didn't like it.

He didn't like it, didn't sign off on it, and the book was never published.
Amazon uses writing to bias for action in meetings. Their culture has DRIs (or dictators) who have authority to make the call, with such authority coming with some level of accountability to the decision made. At Amazon the doc is read, parties discuss, and decision made. At Google the doc is rarely entirely read, mostly commented on, and no decision made until all stakeholders align on a commonly agreed direction.

The amazon way is much less toxic, but does come with a need for writer to invest heavily on a high quality doc. Personally, the Amazon way is better but only works due to their peculiar culture.
Don’t say the chance is zero unless you have a mathematical proof or something. Would the odds be zero if they lose of a crew of astronauts?
It sounds like Kubrick felt betrayed. He collaborated with the author extensively up until receiving a draft.
The attack is only possible when you have untrusted devices on your local LAN. If you’re already bringing your own gateway with a VPN on it then I’m guessing untrusted LAN devices aren’t much of a concern. But if you did have something untrusted on your LAN and you’re using DHCP, then that untrusted device could snoop your unencrypted* traffic with this trick, albeit it couldn’t find your real IP since your gateway is concealing that.

The attack seems most feasible in a coffee shop wifi situation, where you’re unlikely to be bringing your own router.

*by “unencrypted traffic” I mean traffic that’s not encapsulated for transport to your VPN provider. Most everything is HTTPS nowadays so the contents of that traffic would still be encrypted of course.
I have, but it was a long time ago, so I missed the reference.
I think that's because they don't want email providers, Gmail in particular, scraping for purchase history
>The only polling that actually matters anymore is what’s happening on Election Day.

Yes, this is true: according to the pollsters, Trump had zero chance of winning in 2016. They were even saying this while the votes were being counted.

I'm not looking at polls, however, I'm just looking at popularity that I see in general. Hillary was not well-liked at all, and she didn't even have the Gaza problem that Biden has now. People just didn't like her much; she had no charisma. There weren't any big conflicts going on, there were no huge protests at college campuses, there wasn't massive inflation squeezing the working classes like now, etc.

>This has no bearing on US elections.

It totally does.

>A democrat voter isn’t going to vote for Trump because they don’t like Biden.

No, they're going to stay at home, or vote for the Greens, exactly like they did in 2016.

> They’re going to vote for Biden

History doesn't show this at all.
It is complete nonsense. Drinking urine will only aggravate the kidney that is already under heavy stress. It will now have to filter more waste. Moreover, drinking urine will in no way help pass a stone.

The one thing that actually helps is exactly a half dose of a diuretic like furosemide, if combined with enough water, but even then it depends on the size of the stone.
I slightly disagree with your distinction. Privacy is about minimising the amount of data collected that's visible to anyone but you. Your data stays with you and/or only you can see your data, therefore, private. Anonymity isn't about the amount of data collected, but that the data collected or accessible by others can't be linked to you.
I’m wondering if enforcement of this policy is entirely manual, and thus focused on the worst violators, but otherwise leaves out other websites which are being abused through hacking (spam articles posted on otherwise legitimate blogs) or through accepting third-party offers for paid articles.

I’m also a little troubled by the description of parasite SEO given in the linked article[1]; in that sense it seems any website which branches out to a new niche would stand to be penalized.

[1] https://searchengineland.com/google-released-massive-search-...
I think you'll have a problem with BGR data absent ctypes, since you have a numpy array with the base pointing at the first red channel value, and you want an array with the base pointing 2 bytes before the first red channel value. This is almost definitely "unsafe"?.. or does numpy have functions knowing that due to the negative z stride, the red value before the blue value is within the bounds of the original array? I somehow doubt it though it would be very impressive. And I think the last A value is hopelessly out of reach absent ctypes since a safe API has no information that this last value is within the array bounds; more strictly speaking all the alpha values are out of bounds according to the shape and strides of the BGRA array.
Swiss army knife now available without the knife
So, this is a bit of an opus -- the authors would definitely like to usher in a new paradigm for compute is my inexpert reading.

Overall the idea, if I understand it, is that rather than using linear activations between layers in a deep learning setup (so called MLP - Multi-Layer Perceptrons), you use functions ("splines") which can be learned using some sort of backprop at the nodes.

The idea (well, one of many) is that using more complex functions and making them learnable during training means you can encapsulate more complex functions in a lower dimensionality matrix.

Upsides: they claim smaller number of training steps and lower dimensionality for a number of toy problems. Also, since you're training functions and these functions might have periodicity to them, and that periodicity can be adjusted during training, and that periodicity might tie to sets of data with varying states, they claim you can update parts of the periodic functions for specific information without impacting the whole function, and therefore this is a better conceptual architecture for dealing with special cases, "forgetting" and so on.

Downsides: they mention it's much slower to train than an MLP architecture, although they claim they didn't try very hard to optimize.

My totally uninformed complaints: The networks are trained on REALLY simple problems, like approximating x*y. I mean this is a fairly beautifully written and illustrated 40+ page paper, with really quite a lot of LaTeX, and I (mostly) read the whole thing. It feels hard to read it without at least seeing, like, some MNIST training results.

Upshot - I'm not sure that we'll all be training Kan networks in 2024.
https://archive.ph/39R8w
> Palestinians use rape to terrorizing women's, did al Gezira report it?

Replace "Palestinians" with "Jews" in that sentence. It's pretty racist innit? Please be more careful.
There's almost nothing in the greendoc template, I'm not sure it's at all valuable outside of Google.
There's also a Ruby gem that uses it for better-than-Benchmark high-precision timing.

https://github.com/bwbuchanan/absolute_time/blob/master/ext/...

https://rubygems.org/gems/absolute_time

Yes you want this in a development environment or perhaps in some sort of macOS app for developers, but probably not in most apps without a very specific and limited need.
This is a great habit. I wish all projects had a coding style document. Coding philosophy is much more important than tooling and choice of languages IMO. Not having such style guide is like employing builders on a construction project without letting them see the plan.

That said, about this point:

- Ensuring consideration of cross-cutting concerns.

My answer would be "Avoid cross-cutting concerns because they are a violation of the separation of the concerns principle; a violation of the cross-cutting kind" ;p

My observation is that while avoiding cross-cutting concerns can seem challenging at first, creating a code architecture which avoids them leads to much more maintainable and easy to follow code. I've worked on many complex projects; distributed systems, blockchains, P2P messaging systems... but I'm yet to encounter a project which cannot be structured in a way to avoid cross-cutting concerns completely.

That said, IMO, aspects mentioned in the article like "security, privacy, observability" aren't really separate 'concerns' but merely desired characteristics of software components.